Faith in Practice

Health research priorities set by LGBTQI+ people of faith, in their own words.

We asked LGBTQI+ people of faith for one word about their NHS healthcare. This is what they told us:

noticed

Tell us what we have missed Read the report

In Spring 2026, LGBTQI+ people of faith from across the UK came together to say what research into their experiences of NHS healthcare should look at, and how it should be done. You can find out what they said here and in the full report.

Being LGBTQI+ and a person of faith was the focus, but it was rarely the only intersection present. Most participants also live with other minoritised identities, including disability, chronic illness, racialisation, migration history, neurodivergence and HIV status.

We are still listening. If you did not take part, you can tell us what we have missed, anonymously, at the bottom of this page.

Plenty is known about two groups. Almost nothing about people who belong to both.

LGBTQI+ people in NHS healthcare

Many studies have looked at how LGBTQI+ people experience the NHS.

People of faith in NHS healthcare

Many studies have looked at how people of faith experience the NHS.

People who are both, in the same appointment

Almost no studies, and none that asked these patients what research should look at.

Faith in Practice set out to fill that gap. We asked LGBTQI+ people of faith what research into NHS healthcare should examine, how it should be designed, and what it should lead to.

What participants said happens

Healthcare tends to recognise one identity at a time, treating the other as incompatible, irrelevant, or the patient's problem to manage. Six themes, in the order participants returned to them most.

Quotes are in participants' own words. Each person is identified by a number rather than a name, so that nobody can be recognised.

  1. Sexual and reproductive health

    Services configured around heterosexual couples and gay men leave lesbian, bisexual and queer women without a frame. A visible marker of faith can close the sexual history conversation before it starts.

    "I cannot give you the care that you need today. Please complain. I back you 100 per cent, but I cannot give you the care that you need."A clinician, as reported by participant 3

  2. The burden of self-advocacy

    Explaining queerness to faith-aware clinicians and faith to LGBTQI+-aware clinicians, in every encounter. Where the patient could not keep advocating, care often did not happen.

    "I'm proactively advocating for myself, rather than the healthcare provider being conscientious and aware and initiating relevant conversations with me."Participant 4

  3. The limits of the tick-box

    EDI training that files faith and LGBTQI+ identity as separate categories substitutes for conversation. Participants lost access to contraception, sexual health care and screening because their faith was assumed to rule it out.

    "Personally, I feel like a victim of inclusivity. Bad inclusivity."Participant 3

  4. Clinicians from one's own community

    Shared faith or culture can mean shared understanding, or a real risk of exposure. Participants run that risk assessment in every appointment, alone.

    "It's a double-edged sword. They might be more sensitive to things specific to my faith, but I also don't feel safe being out to them."Participant 7

  5. Mental health

    The widest range of experience. Private care was repeatedly described as able to hold faith and LGBTQI+ identity together; NHS pathways tended to address one, or neither.

    "With NHS mental health care, the peoplehood is stripped out."Participant 10

  6. Faith literacy

    Participants did not want clinicians to memorise more about a list of faiths. Knowing what a community "believes" had been used to deny care. They wanted clinicians able to ask, with confidence and without performance.

    "Not super radical, asking to access contraception."Participant 13

Every person in the room had a reason to complain to the NHS.

We asked who had made a formal complaint about an experience related to their faith, their LGBTQI+ identity, or both. Half the room raised their hands. We asked who had cause, but had not gone ahead. The rest of the room did.

Next steps for research and for listening

Faith in Practice was a small project with one purpose: to let LGBTQI+ people of faith set the direction for future research. Participants identified eight priorities for the research they want to see next, and any work that builds on this project will start from those. The priorities are listed in the order participants raised them, and are unranked.

  1. 1
    Sexual and reproductive health at the intersectionWomen's sexual health, cervical screening and HPV, privacy for gay, bi and queer men, HIV stigma in dental and optical care, and conversion practices.
  2. 2
    The cumulative effect of self-advocacyOn help-seeking, trust, and the gap between having cause to complain and complaining.
  3. 3
    How EDI training is designedWho writes it, whether it produces individualised care or new stereotypes, and what happens when faith authority mediates health communication.
  4. 4
    Trust, community clinicians and confidentialityOpen-door triage, shared-language clinician lists, named-clinician booking.
  5. 5
    Mental healthWhat is lost when NHS pathways cannot engage the whole person.
  6. 6
    Faith literacy in clinical practiceAsking well, denominational diversity, and beliefs outside the standard list of major religions.
  7. 7
    Trans people of faith and the changing institutional landscapeThe effect of recent changes to NHS guidance on trust and contact with services.
  8. 8
    Populations missing from current research framingsPeople closeted within heterosexual relationships, and those unreachable through recognised community representatives.

How the research should be done

Participants were asked what future accessible research should look like.

Tell us what we have missed

We will keep listening. What people tell us here will shape any future research, including what it looks at and how it is designed, and we especially want to hear from people who did not take part. The form takes about ten minutes.

What the form asks
  1. Some pages are written for one group in particular. If a page does not apply to you, you can skip it.
  2. Mostly quick tick boxes about things that have happened to you, or that you have noticed, with space to write more if you want to.
  3. Everything you need is in the form itself, so there is nothing to remember from this page.
  4. At the end, there is space for anyone to add their thoughts, and you can choose whether your words may be quoted.
Open the anonymous feedback form Read the report first

Draft: form link to be added before this page is shared.

The form is anonymous. It does not ask for your name or contact details, so please leave out anything that could identify you or anyone else. Every question apart from the first is optional; answer as much or as little as you like. Your words will only be quoted if you say yes, and never with your name. If you would like to be involved in what comes next, email Dr Daniella Shaw at d.shaw@bbk.ac.uk.